3 ms·

"The story does not necessarily end with the Army's decision. Lockheed Martin, which owns Sikorsky could very well protest the decision, which will put the enti

"The story does not necessarily end with the Army's decision. Lockheed Martin, which owns Sikorsky could very well protest the decision, which will put the entire program on hold at least for 100 days while the Government Accountability Office weighs its counterargument." And this is the screwed-up state of DoD procurement in 2024 . . .

dr_orpheus 3y ago
"put the entire program on hold at least for 100 days" I don't think the wording here is quite right. The GAO has 100 days to decide if the protest is valid or not. If it is valid, then the program could be on hold for longer. The GAO could decide day 1 "nope, your protest is not valid" (they won't). Most likely it will be closer to 100 days of the program on hold, but it shouldn't be "at least 100 days". But it also just any government procurement in general, where a protest is par for the course. Common amongst any large NASA procurement as well: https://spacenews.com/gao-denies-l3harris-protest-over-ball-aerospace-weather-satellite-instrument-contract/ https://spacenews.com/gao-denies-l3harris-protest-over-ball-... It is also happens often because even if a company doesn't think they have a valid protest the government will have to release more details of the proposals and so it is often used as a way to gain business intel.
MilStdJunkie 3y ago
Defiant was one of those rare projects where Lockheed and Boeing were teamed up, which helped the program not at all. The Valor had a laser-focus, by comparison. I had the good fortune to have a tiny toe in both programs. "But wait," I hear you ask, "why didn't Boeing supply a design of their own? Don't they make the CH-47" Well . . that's a long story, but the short version is that the 47 was designed a long, long time ago, and it's a Vertol design, not Boeing. Editorial warning, but I'm not sure Boeing has the ability to design a whole lot, these days.

dr_orpheus 3y ago

"put the entire program on hold at least for 100 days" I don't think the wording here is quite right. The GAO has 100 days to decide if the protest is valid or not. If it is valid, then the program could be on hold for longer. The GAO could decide day 1 "nope, your protest is not valid" (they won't). Most likely it will be closer to 100 days of the program on hold, but it shouldn't be "at least 100 days". But it also just any government procurement in general, where a protest is par for the course. Common amongst any large NASA procurement as well: https://spacenews.com/gao-denies-l3harris-protest-over-ball-aerospace-weather-satellite-instrument-contract/ https://spacenews.com/gao-denies-l3harris-protest-over-ball-... It is also happens often because even if a company doesn't think they have a valid protest the government will have to release more details of the proposals and so it is often used as a way to gain business intel.

MilStdJunkie 3y ago

Defiant was one of those rare projects where Lockheed and Boeing were teamed up, which helped the program not at all. The Valor had a laser-focus, by comparison. I had the good fortune to have a tiny toe in both programs. "But wait," I hear you ask, "why didn't Boeing supply a design of their own? Don't they make the CH-47" Well . . that's a long story, but the short version is that the 47 was designed a long, long time ago, and it's a Vertol design, not Boeing. Editorial warning, but I'm not sure Boeing has the ability to design a whole lot, these days.